Enezate Tariq, Omran Jad, Bhatt Deepak L
University of Missouri, Cardiovascular Division, Columbia, MO, United States of America.
University of California San Diego, Sulpizio Cardiovascular Center, San Diego, CA, United States of America.
Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2019 Jul;20(7):553-558. doi: 10.1016/j.carrev.2018.08.020. Epub 2018 Sep 3.
BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Percutaneous pulmonic valve implantation (PPVI) is an alternative treatment strategy to surgical pulmonic valve implantation (SPVI) for right ventricular outflow tract (RVOT) dysfunction. This study sought to compare outcomes of both treatment strategies.
The study population was extracted from the 2014 Nationwide Readmissions Database (NRD) using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) codes for PPVI and SPVI. Study outcomes included all-cause in-hospital mortality, length of index hospital stay (LOS), post-procedural bleeding, mechanical complications of heart valve prosthesis, vascular complications (VC), infective endocarditis (IE), total hospitalization charges, and 30-day readmission rates.
A total of 975 patient discharges (176 in PPVI and 799 in SPVI group) were identified (average age 25.7 years; 57.5% male). PPVI was associated with significantly shorter median LOS (1 versus 5 days, p < 0.01), lower risk of bleeding (4.6% versus 26.4%, p < 0.01), and lower total hospitalization charges ($169,551.7 versus $210,681.8, p = 0.02). There was no significant difference between both groups in terms of all-cause in-hospital mortality (0% versus 1.4%, p = 0.12), mechanical complications of heart valve prosthesis (1.7% versus 2.0%, p = 0.78), VC (2.3% versus 2.0%, p = 0.82), IE (1.7% versus 3.1%, p = 0.31), or 30-day readmission rates (4.4% versus 7.6%, p = 0.16).
Compared with SPVI, PPVI was associated with shorter LOS, lower bleeding, and lower total charges. There was no significant difference between the two strategies in terms of all-cause in-hospital mortality, mechanical complications of heart valve prosthesis, VC, IE, or 30-day readmission rates.
背景/目的:经皮肺动脉瓣植入术(PPVI)是治疗右心室流出道(RVOT)功能障碍的一种替代手术肺动脉瓣植入术(SPVI)的治疗策略。本研究旨在比较两种治疗策略的结果。
使用国际疾病分类第九版临床修订本(ICD-9-CM)中PPVI和SPVI的编码,从2014年全国再入院数据库(NRD)中提取研究人群。研究结果包括全因住院死亡率、首次住院时间(LOS)、术后出血、心脏瓣膜假体的机械并发症、血管并发症(VC)、感染性心内膜炎(IE)、总住院费用和30天再入院率。
共识别出975例患者出院病例(PPVI组176例,SPVI组799例)(平均年龄25.7岁;男性占57.5%)。PPVI与显著缩短的中位LOS(1天对5天,p<0.01)、较低的出血风险(4.6%对26.4%,p<0.01)和较低的总住院费用(169,551.7美元对210,681.8美元,p=0.02)相关。两组在全因住院死亡率(0%对1.4%,p=0.12)、心脏瓣膜假体的机械并发症(1.7%对2.0%,p=0.78)、VC(2.3%对2.0%,p=0.82)、IE(1.7%对3.1%,p=0.31)或30天再入院率(4.4%对7.6%,p=0.16)方面无显著差异。
与SPVI相比,PPVI与更短的LOS、更低的出血率和更低的总费用相关。两种策略在全因住院死亡率、心脏瓣膜假体的机械并发症、VC、IE或30天再入院率方面无显著差异。